Access to appeals
Logan v. Transit
In brief
- Where it stands
- Dismissed
Petition denied.
- What it’s about
- Charise Logan asked the Supreme Court to review her claims that Minnesota’s appeals court dismissed her appeal against First Transit before a transcript deadline, that transcript problems unfairly burdened her despite her approved status to proceed without court fees, and that court staff kept timely filings out of the record.
- Who it affects
- The denial ended Logan's request for Supreme Court review but did not resolve whether Minnesota's appeals court violated her rights.
Summary: written with AI from the case record.
What it's about
The Court refused to hear the case (denied review), so it did not decide those claims.
Logan alleged that a court reporter failed to provide the transcript and that court staff placed more than 150 documents she says were timely filed in “Miscellaneous” files.
Logan framed the transcript and record problems as barriers to appeal under due-process and equal-protection rules.
Question presented
1. Whether the Fourteenth Amendment’s Due Process Clause prohibits a state appellate court from dismissing an appeal for lack of a transcript when the court’s own rules (Minn. R. Civ. App. P. 110.02) provide a 60-day deadline for delivery, yet the court dismissed the case 19 days prior to that deadline? 2. Whether a state violates the Equal Protection Clause and the principles established in Griffin v. Illinois (1956) by dismissing the appeal of an indigent litigant with an approved In Forma Pauperis (IFP) status because of a court reporter’s failure to provide a transcript — effectively creating a wealth-based barrier to appellate review? 3. Whether the systematic practice of a state court clerk relegating over 150 timely-submitted documents to “Miscellaneous” files, thereby withholding them from the official record and judicial review, constitutes a denial of the fundamental right of access to the courts?
Documents
Docket activity
New analysis added
AI analysis generated: Case Briefing
AI analysis generated: Decision Record
Case data updated: summary, question_presented, generation_metadata
Case data updated: question_presented, extraction_metadata
Show 1 moreShow fewer
Brief added: Petition
Sources
Primary materials from the Court and the parties. Grounded in docket records and cited sources. Official filings and opinions remain authoritative.